Temasek Holdings is owned by Ministry of Finance and not Sin
-
Temasek Holdings is owned by Ministry of Finance and not Singaporeans
February 14, 2010
In a letter to the Straits Times Forum yesterday, Myrna Thomas, the Managing Director (Corporate Affairs) of Temasek Holdings reiterates that it is a commercial entity which is wholly owned by the Ministry of Finance (incorporated) in response to an earlier speech by U.S. political economist Prof Huang Yasheng who criticized the Singapore’s government involvement in the private sector.
Speaking at the Civil Service College, Prof Huang urged Singapore to “rethink” the “Temasek model” and warns that Singapore’s state management model has “milked this system for all it is worth.”
“The private sector is the best way to grow the economy. It has the most productive, most innovative and entrepreneurial culture. The state-owned enterprise system doesn’t give you that….You are already hitting the wall. Retaining this strategy could mean sacrificing future growth that is possible only through a bigger, more dynamic private sector,” he said.
Ms Myrna replied that Temasek operates on a “commercial” basis and that the employees of Temasek or its subsidiary companies are not civil servants but run by reputable and experienced business leaders from Singapore and abroad who “constantly innovate and evolve.”
Prof Huang also opined that governments should not get involved in venture financing as they are using taxpayers’ monies and questions how the government can defend its decisions to invest in “failing individuals and projects”:
“Nine out of 10 investment projects fail. Does the government have such a high tolerance for risk? It’s taxpayers’ money, right? I don’t think, politically, it’s legitimate for the government to keep investing in failing individuals and failing projects. How do you defend these decisions?,” he asked.
Ms Myrna did not answer Prof Huang’s question directly which would have embarassed her boss Ho Ching based on its recent “track record” except the usual standard answer that Temasek invests for “sustainable, long-term returns” never mind the fact that a few of its investments such as Shin Corp and ABC Learning already has no returns to speak of.
She defended Temasek for helping many local companies to grow:
“It is this Temasek model that enabled many companies in our stable to grow from humble beginnings to become acknowledged leading players in their respective sectors, able to compete with the best in class globally. They include Singapore Airlines, DBS, CapitaLand, Keppel, SembMarine, PSA, SingTel and ST Engineering.”
What she failed to comprehend is that the very presence of these behemoths with state funding and support is choking the private sector of Singapore and that’s why Singapore can never produce world class companies like Sony, Samsung and Acer.
-
what about the MAS ? is it private like the Federal reserve too ?
-
Temasek's & GIC's investment track records are really getting from bad to worse. Besides the stock market meltdown, the subprime & Maddoff's mega Ponzi Scheme, not to forget the Australian forest fire caused by the broken cables, as well as the recent loss made in the US property investments. Latest is in the forex market, the rush selling of Euros which made a paper loss of 70 mil.
Even till now, there is no firm answer whether the funds in Temasek & GIC are sovereign fund & the losses suffered has to be accountable. But who are they accountable to? The investors or the citizens? If they are accountable to the investors, where did our taxes go? If they are accountable to the citizens, why we citizens have no say in their decisions despite seeing so much losses?
-
thanks to those so called experts working behind the scene. those people have impressive academic credentials. but that doesnt mean they have the foresight.
-
Originally posted by AH TRUTH:
Temasek Holdings is owned by Ministry of Finance and not Singaporeans
February 14, 2010
In a letter to the Straits Times Forum yesterday, Myrna Thomas, the Managing Director (Corporate Affairs) of Temasek Holdings reiterates that it is a commercial entity which is wholly owned by the Ministry of Finance (incorporated) in response to an earlier speech by U.S. political economist Prof Huang Yasheng who criticized the Singapore’s government involvement in the private sector.
Speaking at the Civil Service College, Prof Huang urged Singapore to “rethink” the “Temasek model” and warns that Singapore’s state management model has “milked this system for all it is worth.”
“The private sector is the best way to grow the economy. It has the most productive, most innovative and entrepreneurial culture. The state-owned enterprise system doesn’t give you that….You are already hitting the wall. Retaining this strategy could mean sacrificing future growth that is possible only through a bigger, more dynamic private sector,” he said.
Ms Myrna replied that Temasek operates on a “commercial” basis and that the employees of Temasek or its subsidiary companies are not civil servants but run by reputable and experienced business leaders from Singapore and abroad who “constantly innovate and evolve.”
Prof Huang also opined that governments should not get involved in venture financing as they are using taxpayers’ monies and questions how the government can defend its decisions to invest in “failing individuals and projects”:
“Nine out of 10 investment projects fail. Does the government have such a high tolerance for risk? It’s taxpayers’ money, right? I don’t think, politically, it’s legitimate for the government to keep investing in failing individuals and failing projects. How do you defend these decisions?,” he asked.
Ms Myrna did not answer Prof Huang’s question directly which would have embarassed her boss Ho Ching based on its recent “track record” except the usual standard answer that Temasek invests for “sustainable, long-term returns” never mind the fact that a few of its investments such as Shin Corp and ABC Learning already has no returns to speak of.
She defended Temasek for helping many local companies to grow:
“It is this Temasek model that enabled many companies in our stable to grow from humble beginnings to become acknowledged leading players in their respective sectors, able to compete with the best in class globally. They include Singapore Airlines, DBS, CapitaLand, Keppel, SembMarine, PSA, SingTel and ST Engineering.”
What she failed to comprehend is that the very presence of these behemoths with state funding and support is choking the private sector of Singapore and that’s why Singapore can never produce world class companies like Sony, Samsung and Acer.
first off, I think sg govt should off from the private sectors. Take for instance NTUC. It has caused many small time business like mama shops and econ minimart to become extinct. How can these small time business fight with govt provided that govt has practically unlimited amt of resources? (tax payer's money)
Take cheers for instance. It is govt owned. Aimed to compete with 7-11. the price at cheers also same as 7-11. No cheaper. No beneficiary to citizens.
Then kopitiam. It is owned by Temasek. Govt gave the excuse that they provide competition to other business so that they can keep a check on thir prices. It has been feeding us with bull* all the while.
Everone who goes to kopitiam knows that the price there is not cheap. Just like normal foodcourt.
To sum it all up, govt isnt interested in citizens' pleas. It places itself before citizens. We all know that govt is only interested in profits and themselves.
-
Suck us dry
No more blood, attract some innocent victims from overseas
-
Singaporeans seem oblivious to the implications with the fact that the Ministry of Finance owns Temasek and allow the PAP Government to manipulate excess annual budgetary surplus to be transferred from the Ministry of Finance to Temasek.
Such direct transfer of excess annual budgetary surplus from the Ministry of Finance to Temasek will prevent Parliament and the Elected President - holding the first and second Keys - from guarding the State Assets.
It allow the PAP Government to manipulate excess funds and transfer these funds and any likely further profits generated in a continuous churning of funds that are not reported until hefty losses will require to be reported - as had happened in early 2009, when almost US$30 Billion were declared lost in the financial turmoils in the USA throughout 2008.
The late Elected President Ong Teng Cheong was correct in asking for the full set of accounts of what had to be protected by the Elected President, which was a scheme proposed by MM LKY to thwart any Government formed by any Alternative Political Party or Parties in Singapore.
Unfortunately, as a result of the actions by the late Elected President Ong, MM LKY had to prevent any future Elected President from exercising this executive power that hinder the freedom to act by the Executive Government.
There must be deeper reasons for MM LKY to act against his own proposal and thwart the power of the Elected Presidency to hinder the Government.
-
aiyah, S'pore govt-linked companies can only ''compete'' in S'pore lah........or thru political connections when they're abroad............they keep getting whipped otherwise.........
good.........good..........hope GIC and Temasek go flat broke.............hire more scholars and lose more money lor...........then Ho Ching will step down once again........
she's only staying becoz those clown really think the financial crisis is over...............those fools, it has only begun............
-
Is the financial crisis really over? Who knows, who cares. Let the highly paid politicians go worry about that.
All I know is the MNC I worked in has turned in a profitable quarter after a few years (finally), and is looking to be profitable the coming quarter, and the next few quarters. Benefits have been restored, distressed assets being bought over, and extra bonus are being given out.
It doesn't even feel like recession has comed much to Singapore. Just look at all the queue in front of the restaurants. Look at the take up rate of iphones. Singaporeans are still a pretty affluent bunch in this 'crisis'.
-
Originally posted by Dreamwerkz:
Temasek's & GIC's investment track records are really getting from bad to worse. Besides the stock market meltdown, the subprime & Maddoff's mega Ponzi Scheme, not to forget the Australian forest fire caused by the broken cables, as well as the recent loss made in the US property investments. Latest is in the forex market, the rush selling of Euros which made a paper loss of 70 mil.
Even till now, there is no firm answer whether the funds in Temasek & GIC are sovereign fund & the losses suffered has to be accountable. But who are they accountable to? The investors or the citizens? If they are accountable to the investors, where did our taxes go? If they are accountable to the citizens, why we citizens have no say in their decisions despite seeing so much losses?
Look who is the overall leader of the country you will know why it is such.
dictatorship rules!
-
and look at the long queue in the casino.....
-
Originally posted by eagle:
Is the financial crisis really over? Who knows, who cares. Let the highly paid politicians go worry about that.
All I know is the MNC I worked in has turned in a profitable quarter after a few years (finally), and is looking to be profitable the coming quarter, and the next few quarters. Benefits have been restored, distressed assets being bought over, and extra bonus are being given out.
It doesn't even feel like recession has comed much to Singapore. Just look at all the queue in front of the restaurants. Look at the take up rate of iphones. Singaporeans are still a pretty affluent bunch in this 'crisis'.
Those who are mentioned are people who are still working, there are still many out there who are still jobless. In fact, the number of the CNY stalls outside OUtram MRT station were reduced by about half.
-
i agree with the professor. the state own enterprise are using it peer financial strength to exert and exterminate some business here in singapore. such as NTUC will are causing minimart and mama ship to extinct. the recent wet market saga that sheng song going to take over the wet market.
GIC and temasek are not accountable to anymore. just look at who is the chairman and CEO of both company? they are lee family.
can both of them survive the scrutiny in other countries? they definitely cannot survive the wisdom of thais ppl.
singaporeans think twice. no matter how successful the system might be. a single party rule country has a lifespan of glorious years. it will expire. when that expiry come. singapore will be doom.
that is the reason why all dynasty come to an end.
-
Some one outside sg is helping us say something.... But If people inside sg say something, prepared to go to jail or something =(
-
Free market demand return. However, for soverign fund like those GIC and Temasek, you cannot be sure what other objectives they have. If the shareholders does not invest his or her own money but that of others monies, what make one things that you will care too much. Just like what these cronies said in the soverign funds, it does not matter with the lost, it is only on paper.
The macro economic pictures simply does not add up. If the law required mgt fund to be invested only in fixed income and secured instructment like FDs etc, how could the same law not apply to the government?
WE STUPID SINGAPORE HAD LOST BILLIONS IN 1997 TO THE AMERICAN, WE LOST AGAIN BILLIONS TO THE AMERICAN CREATED INTERNET BUBBLE SCAM, THAN WE CONTINUE TO LOSE BILLIONS TO THE AMERICAN WALL STREET.
ALL THESE LOSSES are sufficient to provide one HUB home free for each Singaporean. 100billion = 100 000 units of HDB.
-
Originally posted by Jay.ho34:
i agree with the professor. the state own enterprise are using it peer financial strength to exert and exterminate some business here in singapore. such as NTUC will are causing minimart and mama ship to extinct. the recent wet market saga that sheng song going to take over the wet market.
GIC and temasek are not accountable to anymore. just look at who is the chairman and CEO of both company? they are lee family.
can both of them survive the scrutiny in other countries? they definitely cannot survive the wisdom of thais ppl.
singaporeans think twice. no matter how successful the system might be. a single party rule country has a lifespan of glorious years. it will expire. when that expiry come. singapore will be doom.
that is the reason why all dynasty come to an end.
